Michael Curry’s strangely named gaming blog

J.P posted over on his blog about a conversation he had at the last ACN. Since I was part of that conversation, I replied, and here are both his post:

At ACN while lamenting the scarcity of “regular” or “classic” Amber games (i.e. games in which players portray younger princes and princesses of Amber) I was reminded that this was no accident. The idea was put forward that there are no new games to be run in a classic Amber setting, and everything must have some twist or gimmick.

I’m stilling clinging desperately to the idea that this is not true.

and my comment:

I believe the actual comment was more along the lines that, in the case of scenarios at Ambercons (which is what was being talked about), most, or at least many, of the more standard Amber ideas had already been run. This is why so many GMs at those cons now end up running games that may not fit some people’s idea of a “classic” Amber game. They don’t want to run something that they or others might be perceived as stale (like the old “Brand is back!” scenario).

This isn’t the same thing as saying that there are *no* “classic” Amber games to be run, only that at this point in the life-cycle of Ambercons, they are more likely to be the exception than the rule.

Frankly, in a non-campaign con setting, I prefer to play games that stray from the “classic” ideas. I think the children of Elders thing works much better in campaign settings than it does in one shots.